A bigot is someone that has strong values on a topic they won't compromise on. Depending on the context and what is at stake it is often good to be a bigot. If you are arguing against a pedophile advocate, there is no reason to entertain their deconstructions of "age of consent" because you don't want adults to have sex with children. You can use studies about the negative psychological effects of children that have had sex with pedophiles, cite it as an abuse of power of a custodial relationship of an adult and child, etc. In the end, you don't need a rational reason to be against pedophilia because it disgusts most Europeans.

In the academic arena, the people that often discover new phenomena are often bigots. Their stubborn obsession with proving their theories is what motivates them to continue to come up with experiments. This obsession is a double edged sword because the bigot inside of the scientist is what leads to them discovering phenomena that often has predictive and practical applications in the real world. On the opposite side of the spectrum, the bigot can lead the scientist to be completely irrational, dogmatic and depending how much influence they have over academic institutions, hold back scientific progress as a whole.

Lastly, I reject the halo you have given he word "bigot". The word bigot is used as a control mechanism by the left to prevent Whites from asserting their core moral values, culture, group identity and their interests as a group. This word is never used equally on different ethnic groups and on leftists as a whole. Leftists force these values on their enemies but never have to follow it themselves. We have no reason to follow values that are designed to destroy our race because our strongest value is the preservation and proliferation of our ethnic group and European race. You never are going to have us justify white genocide in attempt to appear consistent in your leftist moral frame.